The information on this blog about the corruption in America's courts will disgust and frighten you and propel you into a world of racketeering, greed, larceny, malicious prosecution, and outrageous disdain for due process, the Rule of Law, the United States Constitution, the Bill of Rights and Professional Responsibility Standards, Rules and Statutes. This is the Unified Court System of New York State. You will be a victim unless you speak up and protest. by Betsy Combier

Tuesday, November 10, 2009

Robert L. Miller Pleads Guilty to Fraud in Marc Dreier's Scam, And He Will Talk

Update | 4:00 p.m. A former lawyer with the enforcement division of the Securities and Exchange Commission pleaded guilty Monday to conspiring with Marc S. Dreier, a prominent Manhattan lawyer, to dupe hedge funds out of tens of millions of dollars.

The lawyer, Robert L. Miller, 52, of Englewood, N.J., entered the plea to conspiracy and securities fraud charges in a cooperation deal with prosecutors in Federal District Court in Manhattan. His sentencing was scheduled for Feb. 5, The Associated Press reports.

Mr. Miller admitted to conspiring with Mr. Dreier in November 2008 as Mr. Dreier sought to sell more than $44 million in fictitious securities to hedge funds. Mr. Dreier was convicted and sentenced to 20 years for defrauding hedge funds and other investors of $700 million.

Mr. Miller was a lawyer in the S.E.C.’s enforcement division from about 1983 through 1986. Since then, he has worked as an analyst and money manager at various firms in the securities industry, according to court papers.

A charging document filed with the court said Mr. Miller and Mr. Dreier managed an investment fund together at various times from 1999 to 2008.

Prosecutors said Mr. Dreier last year contacted Mr. Miller and offered to pay him $100,000 to impersonate a representative of a Canadian pension plan during a phone call with a New York hedge fund.

Prosecutors said Mr. Miller received the call on a cellphone that Mr. Dreier gave him with a Canadian area code and phone number. The government said Mr. Dreier wired $100,000 into Mr. Miller’s bank account shortly after Mr. Miller impersonated the Canadian pension fund representative, discussing the guarantee that the pension plan had supposedly issued for the $44.7 million note.

It said Mr. Miller also in two separate phone calls impersonated a representative of an Icelandic hedge fund that was supposedly selling a financial note.

Prosecutors said Mr. Miller falsely answered questions from a hedge fund about the structure of the fund, its reasons for selling the note and the documents underlying the transaction.

“I knew what I was doing was wrong and I deeply regret what I did,” Mr. Miller said as he entered the plea before a magistrate judge, The A.P. reports. After his plea, he was released on $100,000 bail.

A lawyer pleaded guilty Monday to impersonating representatives of both a hedge fund and a pension fund in order to assist disgraced ex-attorney Marc S. Dreier (pictured going to Court below)in selling a phony promissory note.

Marc S. Dreier, a prominent lawyer, center, arrived on Monday at a Manhattan court where he was sentenced in a scheme that cost investors more than $400 million.

The surprise plea and the lawyer's agreement to cooperate with prosecutors raised the possibility there might be more arrests in the investigation of Dreier, the former sole equity partner of 250-lawyer Dreier LLP who is serving a 20-year sentence for peddling hundreds of millions of dollars in bogus notes to investors.

Robert L. Miller, a former enforcement lawyer with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, said he helped Dreier pitch a $44.7 million note to two investment funds.

"In summary, I agreed with Marc Dreier that I would make misrepresentations to two hedge funds to induce them to buy notes," Miller on Monday told Southern District of New York Magistrate Judge Ronald L. Ellis. "I knew that what I was doing was wrong and I deeply regret what I did."

Miller, 52, said he was paid $100,000 for phone sessions in which he impersonated a representative of a Canadian pension fund and then a hedge fund based in Iceland. He said that on both occasions he was heavily coached by Dreier on what to say.

Miller pleaded guilty to conspiracy to commit securities fraud and securities fraud pursuant to a plea agreement and is cooperating with Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan R. Streeter in the hopes of getting a break when he is sentenced by Judge Kimba Wood.

In November 2008, when the authorities were closing in on Dreier, Miller offered to sell a New York-based hedge fund a $44.7 million note ostensibly issued by a Canadian company, guaranteed by the Ontario Teachers' Pension Fund and held by the Icelandic hedge fund.

During a phone call with an unnamed New York hedge fund in November 2008, Miller pretended to represent the pension plan, but only after Dreier had given him an outline of the mythical transaction, a copy of the deal's documents, a fictitious e-mail address, the annual report of the pension plan and what prosecutors say were "detailed notes" of what he was supposed to say during the call.

Dreier wired $100,000 into a Miller bank account shortly thereafter.

On Nov. 26, 2008, when Dreier was told by the target hedge fund it was unlikely it would buy the note during the next few days, Dreier turned to another unnamed hedge fund as a backup target.

A representative at the second hedge fund called Dreier and asked to speak with someone with the Icelandic hedge fund that was supposedly selling the note.

Dreier called on Miller to impersonate a second time. He prepared Miller by having one of his assistants look up the weather in Reykjavik, Iceland, and by giving Miller a European cell phone on which to make the call.

Miller impersonated the representative of the Icelandic fund on Nov. 29 and Dec. 1, 2008.

Once the calls were made, the second target fund agreed to do the deal, but only if a representative of the Ontario pension plan appeared in person to sign documents.

Dreier flew to Toronto on Dec. 2, 2008, where he impersonated a lawyer for the pension plan and forged his signature. The move led to his arrest in Canada on a charge of criminal impersonation and his quick return to New York to face charges in the Southern District.

Miller declined to speak Monday after leaving the magistrate judge's court with his attorney, Jacob Laufer.

"He's made a mistake," Laufer said. "He's confronting the consequences of it. He's a decent man."

THIRD PERSON TO PLEAD

Miller, a resident of Englewood, N.J., was with the SEC between 1983 and 1986. According to the criminal information released Monday, he and Dreier managed an investment fund together from 1999 to 2008.

Dreier admitted on May 11, 2009, to selling more than $700 million in bogus real estate and pension plan notes to investors.

He pleaded to one count of conspiracy to commit securities fraud and wire fraud, one count of money laundering, one count of securities fraud and five counts of wire fraud. In addition to his prison sentence, Dreier has been disbarred.

Miller became the third person to plead in the Dreier case.

Like Miller, Dreier ally Kosta Kovachev did some impersonation as part of Dreier's scheme to defraud hedge funds of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Kovachev pleaded guilty Nov. 2 to conspiracy to commit securities fraud for pretending to be chief executive officer of Solow Realty & Development Co., once Dreier's biggest client, and the company whose identity he hijacked to sell fictitious notes to gullible hedge funds. Kovachev also posed as an accountant for the company on another occasion.

Laufer said Miller is unemployed. His name does not appear on the roster of the now-defunct Dreier LLP, which declared bankruptcy on Dec. 16, 2008, just weeks after Dreier surrendered to authorities.

Laufer declined to comment on what, if any, role Miller may have played at the firm.

Miller is scheduled to appear before Judge Wood on Feb. 5, 2010. No date has been set for sentencing.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Anna Arreola is also handling the prosecution.

July 14, 2009Lawyer Gets 20 Years in $700 Million FraudBy BENJAMIN WEISER, NY TIMESMarc S. Dreier, once a high-flying New York lawyer who orchestrated an elaborate fraud scheme that bilked hedge funds and other investors of $700 million, was sentenced on Monday to 20 years in prison by a judge who rejected the government’s request for a much longer sentence.

Prosecutors had recommended a sentence of 145 years, just five years less than was successfully sought last month in the case of Bernard L. Madoff for his multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme.

But the judge, Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court in Manhattan, distinguished Mr. Dreier’s case from Mr. Madoff’s, in which prosecutors have said there were thousands of victims and billions of dollars in losses.

By contrast, the judge referred to Mr. Dreier’s victims, including a small group of hedge funds and other investors — who lost about $400 million — as well as hundreds of employees who lost their jobs when his law firm collapsed.

“Mr. Dreier is not going to get much sympathy from this court,” Judge Rakoff said, “but he is not Mr. Madoff from any analysis, and that’s why I can’t understand why the government is asking for 145 years.”

In carrying out his scheme, Mr. Dreier sold fake promissory notes to the hedge funds and other investors. He created phony financial statements and accounting documents, and paid people to impersonate others to trick prospective investors into believing the notes were genuine.

Mr. Dreier’s case exploded into public view in December, when he was arrested in Toronto after trying to impersonate an employee of the Ontario Teachers’ Pension Plan in an attempt to sell a fake note for millions of dollars.

Prosecutors have also said that Mr. Dreier, 59, a graduate of Yale University and Harvard Law School, stole more than $46 million from his clients.

Mr. Dreier pleaded guilty in May to all eight charges in the indictment against him, which included conspiracy, securities and wire fraud and money laundering. When Judge Rakoff asked on Monday whether the government’s request for 145 years was serious, a federal prosecutor, Jonathan R. Streeter, replied, “We’re serious about asking for a sentence of life imprisonment.”

When the judge pressed him, Mr. Streeter said that any term of more than 30 years would accomplish that goal.

Mr. Streeter cited what he called “the unbelievable abuse of trust that occurred in this case.”

He also cited the judge’s own comments when Mr. Dreier pleaded guilty, that Mr. Dreier had “shown that he is to be ranked with those who have committed some of the most egregious frauds in history,” and that he had “disgraced the honorable profession of law.”

Mr. Streeter also reiterated the government’s position that Mr. Dreier had used the proceeds of his scheme to finance a lavish lifestyle. He owned a luxury apartment on the Upper East Side, properties in the Hamptons, a valuable art collection, expensive cars and an $18 million yacht, documents show.

Mr. Dreier’s lawyer, Gerald L. Shargel, had recommended a sentence of 10 to 12 ½ years. Of the government’s proposed punishment, he told the judge that the idea that there has to be “shock and awe of such epic proportions is not necessary.”

“It may be a fraud of epic proportions,” Mr. Shargel said. “I don’t minimize it in any way.” But he said that it was “not the worst” of human behavior.

Mr. Dreier, wearing a dark suit and showing no obvious emotion, rose at one point and offered an extensive apology to his family, his clients and the lawyers who worked for him. “I’m sorry, deeply sorry, for the harm and the sadness that I have caused to so many people,” he said.

He also cited a letter that he wrote to Judge Rakoff last week, and said that he hoped that the victims of his crimes would read it or “hear me now,” and feel his shame and get some satisfaction.

In the letter, he said that he began stealing in 2002, taking money from the settlement proceeds that were owed to a client.

He said that he had hoped to repay the money quickly. But instead, he wrote, he stepped into “a quicksand of spending,” and found himself “running a massive Ponzi scheme with no apparent way out.”

Prosecutors have said that Mr. Dreier earned about $400,000 a year before he began committing his crimes; Mr. Dreier, in his letter, said that colleagues and clients were doing “better financially and seemingly enjoying more status,” and that he felt “crushed by a sense of underachievement.”

In the classic form of a Ponzi scheme, Mr. Dreier used some of the proceeds of his sales of fake notes to pay earlier investors. The victims of his fraud suffered more than $400 million in actual losses, prosecutors have said.

“I recall only that I was desperate for some measure of the success that I felt had eluded me,” he wrote, adding: “I lost my perspective and my moral grounding, and really, in a sense, I just lost my mind.”

July 9, 2009145-Year Term Suggested in Lawyer’s Fraud CaseBy BENJAMIN WEISER, NY TIMES

Federal prosecutors recommended on Wednesday that a judge impose a 145-year sentence on Marc S. Dreier, the prominent New York lawyer who pleaded guilty to an elaborate scheme in which hedge funds and other investors, as well as clients, lost more than $400 million.

In a letter to the judge, Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court in Manhattan, the prosecutors cited statements that the judge had made when Mr. Dreier pleaded guilty in May: that he “has shown that he is to be ranked with those who have committed some of the most egregious frauds in history,” and that “he has disgraced the honorable profession of law.”

The requested sentence is just five years less than the term prosecutors successfully sought against Bernard L. Madoff for his multibillion-dollar Ponzi scheme; that sentence was cited by both sides.

Mr. Dreier, 59, a graduate of Yale University and Harvard Law School, sold more than $700 million worth of fake promissory notes to hedge funds and other investors, and stole more than $46 million from clients, the government has said. He is to be sentenced on Monday.

His lawyer, Gerald L. Shargel, offered a sharply differing view of what Mr. Dreier’s sentence should be, recommending a term of 10 to 12 1/2 years. “In seeking some measure of leniency,” Mr. Shargel wrote to the judge on Wednesday, “we appeal not to sympathy but to reason.”

Mr. Shargel said such a sentence would be “both rational and proportionate.” He said his client was “profoundly remorseful” and had cooperated extensively with investigators as they tried to track down the millions lost.

Mr. Shargel briefly cited the Madoff sentence, saying that the facts of that case were unique and that the sentence was “far out of line” and “likewise unique and unsuitable for comparison.”

The government’s papers, submitted by the office of Lev L. Dassin, the acting United States attorney in Manhattan, said a big sentence was appropriate, and cited Mr. Madoff’s sentence and other substantial if lesser terms meted out in large fraud cases.

Mr. Dassin’s office emphasized that Mr. Dreier had orchestrated his fraud “while holding himself out as a legitimate and prominent lawyer.” The office said thousands of lawyers in New York and elsewhere were “surrounded by the wealth and lifestyles of the clients they serve.”

“Imposing a long term of imprisonment in this case,” the prosecutors said, “will serve to deter other lawyers who are tempted to steal, cheat or otherwise dishonor their profession to achieve personal wealth.”

In his own letter to the judge, Mr. Dreier acknowledged that his crimes were “inexcusable” and said he deserved “a significant prison sentence.”

“I have already been disgraced beyond anything I could ever have imagined,” he wrote, adding that despite any good he had accomplished, he would “always be remembered as a thief.”

“I have lost all my friends,” he said. “I have lost my law firm, my law license and all that I ever owned. I have seen my family suffer the unimaginable. I have lost my past and my future. I have lost everything a man can lose. And now I will lose my freedom as well, and rightly so.”

Prosecutors said in their letter that Mr. Dreier had been earning about $400,000 a year before committing his crimes, and that he told court investigators he had been “dissatisfied” with his life and envious of others “who had achieved greater success.”

The government has said he used much of his money to maintain a lavish lifestyle. He had a luxury apartment on the Upper East Side, beachfront properties in the Hamptons, expensive cars, an $18 million yacht and a valuable art collection, with some works bought for more than $6 million.

Updated, 2:05 p.m. | The government has recommended that a federal judge in Manhattan impose a 145-year sentence on Marc S. Dreier, the prominent New York lawyer who has pleaded guilty to a fraud scheme that bilked hedge funds and other investors out of at least $400 million.

In a submission on Wednesday to the judge, Jed S. Rakoff of Federal District Court,(pictured at right) federal prosecutors quoted statements by the judge himself at Mr. Dreier’s guilty plea in May, that the lawyer “has shown that he is to be ranked with those who have committed some of the most egregious frauds in history” and that “he has disgraced the honorable profession of law.”

The sentence request is just five years less than prosecutors sought — and a judge imposed — on Bernard L. Madoff, who pleaded guilty to orchestrating the largest Ponzi scheme in history.

Mr. Dreier, 59, is to be sentenced on Monday.

In their recommendation, prosecutors said that in the alternative, Judge Rakoff should impose “a term of years that would assure that Dreier will remain in prison for life and forcefully promote general deterrence.”

The document, submitted by Lev S. Dassin, the acting United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, cited Mr. Dreier’s fraudulent conduct but also noted that “he did this all while holding himself out as a legitimate and prominent lawyer.”

“This conduct, and the resulting harm, is especially deserving of a lengthy prison sentence,” prosecutors said.

Mr. Dreier’s lawyer, Gerard L. Shargel, offered a sharply differing view of the sentence his client should receive, recommending to the judge on Wednesday that Mr. Dreier receive a term of 10 to 12½ years.

Mr. Dreier, in a personal letter to the judge that runs four pages (see below), acknowledged that his crimes were “inexcusable” and that he expected and deserved “a significant prison sentence.”

“I have already been disgraced beyond anything I could ever have imagined,” Mr. Dreier wrote, adding that despite any good he had accomplished in his life, he would “always be remembered as a thief.”

“I have lost all my friends,” he wrote. “I have lost my law firm, my law license and all that I ever owned. I have seen my family suffer the unimaginable. I have lost my past and my future. I have lost everything a man can lose. And now I will lose my freedom as well, and rightly so.”

Sunny Shue, died Saturday June 26, 2010. Video that Sunny did on April 9 2010, asking for protection from Judge Joseph Golia. Wednesday...

September 2, 2009 Hearing With Senator John Sampson on Judicial Accountability in New York State

We went to a Hearing with Senator John Sampson on September 24, 2009 on the New York Judicial Syatem. A few people were able to speak, and many others signed up to speak at a later date...that Sampson never scheduled.

First published in print: Monday, January 11, 2010
Here we thought that the first order of business this year for state Senate Democratic leader John Sampson would be to help regain that institution's credibility by passing radical ethics reforms.

The need for them would seem to be brutally obvious, in the wake of the conviction of former Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno on federal corruption charges and Governor Paterson's calls for requiring state officials members to disclose their outside income. First, though, Mr. Sampson has joined a large Manhattan law firm where one of the founding partners is on the board of the state Trial Lawyers Association.
That's right. Mr. Sampson now works not only for the people of New York, but also for the firm of Belluck & Fox, according to a New York Post report.

His salary in the former position is a matter of public record, of course -- $88,500. His salary in his new job, however, is something Mr. Sampson isn't about to disclose.

Just as New Yorkers need to learn more about legislators' outside interests, Mr. Sampson offers them less.

Imagine, then, what people might think if this is one more year when the Legislature fails to pass ethics laws. Or if it does, only a watered down version of what's need to clean up an institution where criminal indictments and convictions have become too commonplace?

What were Mr. Sampson's priorities, they might wonder -- transparency in government, or shielding from both his own finances and Belluch & Fox's clients?

The same questions might be asked as well of Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, who holds a position of counsel to another Manhattan law firm, Weitz & Luxenberg. Little is known by the public about that arrangement, too, thanks to the alarmingly inadequate financial disclosure requirements for legislators that Mr. Silver seems to think are entirely adequate. We know he works for that particular firm, one of the largest tort law firms in New York, but we don't know what the nature of his work is, or on whose behalf he does it.

That will become all the more relevant in the event someone else in the Legislature tries to push for rewriting the state's medical malpractice laws or otherwise changing tort laws this session. Two of the most powerful people in state government work for law firms closely associated with the leading opponent of such legislation, namely the Trial Lawyers Association.

In Mr. Silver's case, he rather famously said of his legal work a half-dozen years ago, "I don't think it's a conflict. How many times do you want to hear this?"

In Mr. Sampson's case, the word comes from his office that his outside work won't interfere with his official duties.

Not exactly endorsements of ethics reform, are they?

THE ISSUE:

The state Senate Democratic leader has another job, too, not that he wants to talk about it.

THE STAKES:

When ethics reform is a major issue, how serious is he about stronger financial disclosure requirements?

Electronic Libraries and FOIA Links

Accountability is the Key

Westchester Guardian TV

Loading...

Click picture to view website

Victims-of-Law

Who is a Victim-of-Law?Victims-of-Law are persons who have been subjected to tyrannical or arbitrary rulings or edicts in violation of constitutional and civil rights under the democratic maxim reminiscent of our Republic -- the "Rule of Law"

The victims of unethical and corrupt lawyers, judges and employees of the state and federal judiciary demand accountability from those who abuse the power of office while they remain absolutely immune. The media as well as the legislative and executive branches of government traditionally ignore these abuses. The judicial branch itself hurls insults at the victim claiming they are nothing more than a 'disgruntled litigant' while ignoring substantive allegations.

It is essential to empower the victims of legal abuses. Our strength is in our numbers thus the more people that demand their constitutional and civil rights the quicker they will be attained.

What most people do not comprehend is that judges are immune from civil lawsuits. If a judge unlawfully imprisoned someone or maliciously denied due process in a case that cost a litigant millions of dollars, it doesn't matter. There is no redress for the aggrieved person.

The emotional and physical health problems inherent in these abuses are now coming to light but the judicial branches throughout our country continue to avoid or deliberately ignore what they have helped to create.

This website hopes to publish documented proof of many of the deliberate violations of the 'rule of law, the doctrine upon which our Constitutional Republic is based.

This website hopes to publish documented proof of many of the deliberate violations of the 'rule of law, the doctrine upon which our Constitutional Republic is based.

What is the "Rule of Law"? Equality and the Law

The right to equality before the law, or equal protection of the law as it is often phrased, is fundamental to any just and democratic society. Whether rich or poor, ethnic majority or religious minority, political ally of the state or opponent--all are entitled to equal protection before the law.

The democratic state cannot guarantee that life will treat everyone equally, and it has no responsibility to do so. However, writes constitutional law expert John P. Frank, "Under no circumstances should the state impose additional inequalities; it should be required to deal evenly and equally with all of its people."

No one is above the law, which is, after all, the creation of the people, not something imposed upon them. The citizens of a democracy submit to the law because they recognize that, however indirectly, they are submitting to themselves as makers of the law. When laws are established by the people who then have to obey them, both law and democracy are served.

The Supreme CourtThe Framers considered the rule of law essential to the safekeeping of social order and civil liberties. The rule of law holds that if our relationships with each other and with the state are governed by a set of rules, rather than by a group of individuals, we are less likely to fall victim to authoritarian rule. The rule of law calls for both individuals and the government to submit to the law's supremacy. By precluding both the individual and the state from transcending the supreme law of the land, the Framers constructed another protective layer over individual rights and liberties. --Reprinted from U.S. Dept. of State

Judicial Immunity is AbsoluteIn an unprecedented degree of 'abuse of power' judges decreed themselves absolutely immune from civil suit when they are "acting maliciously and corruptly." In 1996 the 104th Congress passed the Federal Courts Improvement Act amending the Civil Rights statute to give further immunities to malicious and corrupt judges.

Sec. 309. Prohibition against awards of costs, including attorney's fees, and injunctive relief against a judicial officer.28 USC 2412 note.>> for Costs.--Notwithstanding any other provision of law, no judicial officer shall be held liable for any costs, including attorney's fees, in any action brought against such officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, unless such action was clearly in excess of such officer's jurisdiction.(b) Proceedings in Vindication of Civil Rights.--Section 722(b) of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1988(b)) is amended by inserting before the period at the end thereof "except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity such officer shall not be held liable for any costs, including attorney's fees, unless such action was clearly in excess of such officer's jurisdiction".

(c) Civil Action for Deprivation of Rights.--Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1983) is amended by inserting before the period at the end of the first sentence: ``, except that in any action brought against a judicial officer for an act or omission taken in such officer's judicial capacity, injunctive relief shall not be granted unless a declaratory decree was violated or declaratory relief was unavailable''.

Advocate for truth and An End To Judicial Immunity

About Betsy Combier

Reporter, paralegal, advocate,I will investigate, search on the internet and in all data bases for information that will help a person in need of resolution to a problem.I believe in substantive and procedural due process for all individuals, groups and organizations and trademarked the term "e-accountability" to describe the purpose of my work. I am the parent of four daughters.

National Forum on Judicial Accountability Badge

Google+ Badge

Notable Events Outside New York State

Search This Blog

Loading...

Who is John Libecci?

On Sunday, August 16, 2009, a friend of a friend called me at approximately 2:10PM, a Mr. John Libecci. Mr. Libecci is, I understand, a private investigator who knows a friend of mine socially. I asked whether he could help me find out some information involving my federal court case filed in United States District court on June 8, 2009 involving the Surrogate Court and my mother's Will. After I told him about the property being taken by the court, he told me that the court never takes property without a reason; after I told him that the Will was never probated since I filed the Will (of my mom) on March 17, 1998), Mr. Libecci told me that "obviously the Will was not done right", and said that he worked for the Courts and the Judges. He would not tell me what he did for the Court and the judges, then hung up. If anyone has information about Mr. John Libecci please email me at betsy@parentadvocates.org. You may send me any information anonymously.